02/05/1997 03:41 PM Senate RES

 SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 8                                                 
 Urging the United States Congress to give an affirmative expression           
 of approval to a policy authorizing the state to regulate,                    
 restrict, or prohibit the export of unprocessed logs harvested from           
 its land and from the land of its political subdivisions and the              
 University of Alaska.                                                         
                                                                               
  -SCHEDULED, BUT NOT HEARD                                                    
                                                                               
                                                                               
        SB   8 AIRPORT/SHOOTING FACILITY NOISE LEVELS                        
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN HALFORD  called the Senate Resources Committee meeting to         
 order at 3:41 p.m. and announced   SB 8  to be up for consideration.          
 He noted a letter from the Alaska Municipal League (AML) requesting           
 an amendment that required a substantial change in use of the                 
 facility.                                                                     
                                                                               
  SENATOR LINCOLN  noted that the letter also wanted to delete                 
 "prohibition" of the CS on page 2, line 1 and insert "exemption."             
 She asked why that hadn't been done.  CHAIRMAN HALFORD replied that           
 it wasn't a major concern and the two words meant the same, but               
 were simply different styles.                                                 
                                                                               
 Number 40                                                                     
                                                                               
  SENATOR TAYLOR  moved to adopt the CS to SB 8.  SENATOR LINCOLN              
 objected for purposes of discussion on the issue.  MR. ROBERT REED,           
 Department of Law, said he had talked with Kevin Ritchie, Executive           
 Director, AML, who said the use of "exemption" was made for                   
 consistency throughout the bill.  MR. REED said that the general              
 rule in a court of law is that if you use a different term, you               
 must have a different meaning.  They assumed the legislature didn't           
 have a different meaning.                                                     
                                                                               
  SENATOR LINCOLN  said she would like to further amend the bill,              
 then, so it would be consistent.  CHAIRMAN HALFORD said as a                  
 general rule he would go along with legislative drafters rather               
 than outside agencies and he wasn't exactly sure why it was done.             
                                                                               
  SENATOR TAYLOR  explained that "prohibition" was against bringing a          
 nuisance suit under this section and he thought it was much clearer           
 worded that way.                                                              
                                                                               
  SENATOR LINCOLN  withdrew her objection.                                     
                                                                               
  SENATOR TAYLOR  objected briefly to say that his only concern was            
 that using terms like "unless the facility substantially changes              
 the use of the facility after the person acquired the property" was           
 a pretty good sized loophole.  And this law is trying to establish            
 something that is clear-cut.                                                  
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN HALFORD  said he was willing to go along with it because he         
 thought they meant a substantial change to mean air carrier                   
 aircraft vs. light aircraft and not the number of flights or the              
 amount of activity; and if it was their intention to change it                
 based on the amount of activity, he wasn't interested in changing             
 it.                                                                           
                                                                               
  SENATOR SHARP  questioned using "usages" on line 6 instead of "use."         
 MR. REED said he thought "substantial change" would depend on the             
 facts of a particular case unless there is a clear intent                     
 statement.                                                                    
                                                                               
  SENATOR TAYLOR  asked if he would agree with Senator Halford's               
 analogy of a shooting range that was only open on weekends changing           
 to being open seven days a week being a substantial change.  MR.              
 REED replied that it certainly could be construed that way.  The              
 only case he read today that had to do with substantial changes was           
 the airport case in which case they had paved what was formerly a             
 dirt airport.  That significantly changed the traffic and opened it           
 to larger aircraft.                                                           
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN HALFORD  said he didn't mind the larger aircraft, but he            
 did mind the increased traffic.  He suggested the wording: "a                 
 substantial change to the type of use of the facility."  MR. REED             
 responded that using more adjectives restricts the meaning a court            
 could consider a substantial change.                                          
                                                                               
   Number 186                                                                  
                                                                               
  SENATOR TAYLOR  withdrew his motion to adopt the CS to SB 8 and              
 moved to pass SB 8 from committee with individual recommendations.            
 There were no objections and it was so ordered.